Why are the missiles so anemic? Can barely shoot down someone that’s not flying straight.
Even strike drones can dodge these missiles with 2 barrel rolls. Someone flying perpendicular? Don’t even waste the missile.
The radar wobbles like it’s drunk, IRST won’t even bother to lock. You will die of old age before managing to lock/shoot down the 6 AGMs coming at you from 8km fired by the A10 that is rearming at the airfield
It’s a 32g missile that forgets it’s 32g halfway to the target. It has “”“3"”" kg of explosive mass and you still need to fire 3 missiles to take down a recon drone
A miserable experience. I’m tired of SPAAs being so useless and CAS so oppressive
Its not gonna be anywhere near 32g at targets farther than like 6km, like all SPAA missiles they start losing energy way before the listed range, pantsir states like what 18-20km, but the missile is basically dead at 10 for hitting a target that isnt flying in a straight line.
Bad CAS players pretty much give all these systems a way overhyped review.
You are in charge of pulling lead for the missile, if you are firing at any aspect but headon and starting the missile aimed directly at or near the plane that launch is done.
The 2s6 is actually somewhat small, great mobility, and it can defend itself pretty well its one of my favorite spaa, but ya you aren’t hitting brained CAS players farther than like 6-7km, and inside these ranges it takes a lot of effort on your part, if you just aim at the plane and dont react or setup lead properly its gonna have no energy and be easily dodged.
Pretty much no matter what SPAA you play CAS has the advantage if they know what they are doing. And your only chance of getting a kill is when they get greedy going for a kill, get into a dogfight, or dump all their energy for some reason. Of course theres plenty of people who just stare down tpod for 10+ seconds and make themselves easy kills too.
Use it as a Gepard, focus on close range targets like helicopters and other ground vehicles, pretty efficient against helicopters if you use the IRST mode in the Radar track to not let the targets be aware of your intentions,
The missile should be effective at 4.00 km at most, overall, excluding the missile performance, it’s a great vehicle to play. A public favorite in ground simulator battles.
Same can be said to anyone complaining about the M1 Abrams when it’s the best main battle tank at its battle rating, delusional people as always. Youself serve as proper example of this.
Honestly having played both of them OSA>2S6 for the most part.
While I do find the 2S6 better than the OSA for killing helicopters and ordinance (both do it well enough though) I find the OSA despite being a bus to drive around is just a far better all-round vehicle with the missiles being way more responsive so dealing with planes is easier.
For <5km ranges Strela should be better.
For >5km ranges Osa should be better.
It can be the best 10.7 AA because it’s the only one there, right ?
Seeing people that want to push it up in BR to face even more planes with 10km+ ordnance is astounding.
People look at the stat card for spaa and think thats the effective range, same problem on dev server with all the new spaa and people wondering why they aren’t slamming people from that range unless they are bots.
OSA was miserable to play for me and I gave up, gigantic bus with no mobility, no way to defend itself, I just died on any map that didnt have 2 story building to hide behind to people pushing spawn. At least pantsir has guns, and these new spaa has multi vehicle aspect going for them.
And yes I know dont sit in spawn but on a good majority of maps sightlines to spawn also include basically the entire grid portion of the map on your side.
I’m aware that missiles will lose their performance as they travel. But this missiles is too sluggish even while its burning. Firing this missiles makes me feel like i suddenly have 800ms ping.
Tunguska being the best SPAA at that tier is like saying someone is the best student in a special ed class.
Take the Strela for example, it’s very good below 5km IF you know there is plane up. But planes such as the A10 completely nullifies it. There are 0 things the Strela can do against AGM fired from outside its range
And that guy calling me a “delusional russian main”; I’m speaking as a SPAA player. If it makes you feel better; all SPAA are suffering
M1 Abrams is indeed inferior just because of the basket and turret ring issues, and the idea of its hull being present on the SEPV2 is actually absurd.
Atleast i do not protect the KH38MT from being deleted from the game and my argument is “Muh smoke or hide”
Converting that to real measurements: That is still within range for Tunguska. I know this is the case as occasionally a friend and I will run a full line up of AAs with the Tunguska being the one primarily used (sometimes have a strela and tunguska up to cover weaknesses), and you are most definitely within range at that altitude. Limits the time to engage you, sure, but that’s definitely an approachable target.
Not sure why folk are complaining about 2s6. It’s a bit fiddly to use without practice, but it holds up incredibly well. Found it becomes oppressive in a well coordinated squad, with the only real threat to you being people who spend 5 minutes climbing to 9km+ vertical to drop guided bombs. Only really starts to struggle in a full uptier, but even then, it’s still quite threatening.
25 to 30k ft is 7.5 - 9km. Add on a diaganol angle to that as well and the fact that missiles have less range when they have to climb vs fly level and you can start to see the problem.
It can engage something flying at 10+km away at only 10.7.
30k ft is about as high as I can get the Jaguar, so that means you have to be really really careful otherwise you will be killed before your GBU has even fallen half way to the target. Usually forcing full defensive flying.
In contast to things like the XM-975, Stomer HVM, FlaRakPz 1, etc etc, that is vastly greater range. I dont think Id even need to defend against those at 30k ft.
The closest thing I can think of to the performance of the 2S6 is the ADATS at 11.7. A full BR higher and unlike the 2S6 doesnt necessarily even have a gun.
Aye, I like shooting down jags lol they’re one of the comfier platforms to engage.
Also I’m not defending tunguska if that were unclear, I’d see it at 11.3 if I had my way. Or higher, if we got some decompression. Do pretty alright with it and there’s been several points where I’ve been wondering why it is so low with the bells and whistles. But I do think 11.3 should be the upper bound of platforms like it (adats etc should go down to match) until we’ve got some separation in BRs.
.8m and 5km vertical puts you well within the comfortable engagement envelope of Tunguska. To effectively escape that comfortable engagement scenario you need speed inversely proportional to your altitude.